Forum:Different universes on a page
I have found a way to make tabs on pages. I think this will be a great way to handle the universe issues and allow the "bad" factions viewpoints expressed on pages. I have edited the Heavy Tank page to show how this can be done, since it had little info on it anyway. It does need a bit more "decorating" to look pleasing. And a way to make to OOU (out of universe) tab to display automatically (which I think can be done). I figured I'd present this as an alternative. --DarkMastero 10:32, October 8, 2009 (UTC) Got the OOU displaying automatically. --DarkMastero 10:36, October 8, 2009 (UTC) I think the current disambiguation page-based scheme is fine as it is. We're moving toward a "one unit, one article" scheme, so that makes the "database" organization in this scheme unnecessary. Also, its far better organizationally if OOU sections are unit specific. - Meco (talk, ) 22:21, October 8, 2009 (UTC) I agree that the OOU should be unit specific as they don't reflect any POV and only should talk about units in reflect to a specific game. But the good thing about this is that we could have an OOU page for each unit while having a few units can share different "database pages" if desired. The database pages also allow for the "bad" factions to have their POV expressed which I'm sure fans of such factions would enjoy. Currently this Wiki seems to present info from the viewpoints of GDI, Allies, and USA in Tiberium, Red Alert, and Generals universes respectfully.--DarkMastero 23:14, October 8, 2009 (UTC) :I think tabs are useful, if the same unit appears in multiple games (such as the X-66 Mammoth Tank or Titan Mk. II), so that we have two pages in one. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/4/4a/Naglowaa_se.gif/11px-Naglowaa_se.gif Tagaziel (call!) 08:08, October 9, 2009 (UTC) Then perhaps one tab for lore, and a tab each for each game's gameplay/OOU? As for perspective issue, some of the templates in "Category:Message boxes" are intended to allow multiple campaign information to be put into one article. However, I think tabs for each campaign would be more useful in, say, story/history articles, like "Third World War (Red Alert 3)" where there is significant content. - Meco (talk, ) 13:15, October 9, 2009 (UTC) What I had actually thought was that each unit page from each game would have it's own OOU section but share lore sections. I also didn't intend for the lore sections to contain stuff from non-cannon missions (as those could be listed in the OOU sections under campaigns subsection in an out of universe context) but just to show different factions opinions on such units. For example Nod would praise stuff like Fanatics for their zeal while GDI would likely demonize them for suicide tactics. Now for the universe problem it would look alot smoother then sticking tags inside articles, which usually seems to just leave a sentence or two standing by itself. For example the Red Alert and Tiberian Dawn Mammoth Tank pages could have their own OOU tabs separate from eachother but share GDI and Nod lore tabs with eachother. While their Allied and Soviet lore tabs would note them evolving into the Apocalypse Tank. This would also help with some of the "sub units" who really don't have much lore. For example the Shard Walker could have it's own OOU tab while sharing lore tabs with the Gun Walker. This could also be used on character pages. For example Kane would be praised by Nod for brining "divination", while GDI would put more emphasis on his atrocities. Scrin largely see him as a mysterious human who lured harvesting operations to Earth for reasons unknown. Allied and Soviet lore would just note him as being an unidentified advisor for Stalin. The current page could be something akin to an OOU page, perhaps a "Civilian Database" or something. The main disadvantage with putting more then one OOU on a page would be the categories and the navigation templates that link to all of the other units its' faction possesses in the game. If you have separate OOU pages you would only have a few categories and usually only one navigation template. If you guys still want to go your way I'll be cool with it. I just felt that the main advantage of tabs is that you could combine lore sections that look ugly when their too short while keeping the OOU sections separate that look muddled when one tries to put different games gameplay on the same page. Finally allowing different factions' general opinions might help to attract fans of said factions. I cleaned my example for the Heavy Tank a while back of anyone wants to look again.--DarkMastero 19:01, October 9, 2009 (UTC) I'm not convinced of the utility for having tabs for faction lore perspectives. It seems like a recipe for duplication through rewording, and an invitation for needless hyperbole. (GDI: "Kane vision of a Tiberium world and a transformed humanity brought untold suffering for over half a century." Nod: "The Messiah's majestic vision sought to bring power and well-being to the disaffected. This threatened GDI hegemony and they violently opposed Kane at every turn." Scrin: "Kane is an influential human who instigated the invasion of Earth. Further research is ongoing.") Easier, for maintainers and for readers, just to get the lore into a single integrated article, rather than split into tabs. This is one of the reasons for the universe and campaign notices: they serve as clear "go over here"/"may not be canon" indicators during a browse through, without any additional work on the part of the reader. We don't need to worry about the Shard Walker/Gun Walker situation. Based on a recent thread, we are edging toward "one article per 'unique' unit". I interpret this to mean the Shard Walker is to have a separate article than the Gun Walker ('unique' via different name.) As I said, I am more in favour of tabs for gameplay info per game. So the Tiberian Dawn Mammoth tank there would might be tabs for "lore", "Tiberian Dawn gameplay", "Tiberian Sun gameplay". - Meco (talk, ) 17:14, October 10, 2009 (UTC)